""piers morgan live" starts now. >> what is your view of him. >> uh-huh uh-huh. he lucky i'm a christian. >> in just a moment you'll hear what his partner said. i'll talk to george zimmerman's attorney, mark o'mara and a man so moved by what rachel jeantel said he wants to pay for her to go to college and juror b 37 talking to anderson cooper. >> because of the only two options you had second-degree murder or manslaughter, you felt neither applied? >> right -- well because --

because of the heat of the moment and the stand your ground. he had a right to defend himself. >> tonight another controversial jury verdict, o.j. simpson's acquittal 18 years ago. what it's like to live with a verdict that shocked the nation. i sat down with rachel jeantel what turned out to be extraordinary. she had a lot to say. >> they tried to paint a picture of somebody interested in guns, took a lot of drugs. let's get to the truth about that. did he ever talk to you about guns? >> no. >> did you ever see him with a gun? >> no. >> what about drugs? >> drugs? okay. weed. you say marijuana -- >> uh-huh. >> we in my area, we see weed. my area weed for trayvon, i can explain one thing. weed don't do -- ever him go crazy. it just ever him go hungry. when the state closed, they trying to explain what kind of person i am. you can see the kind of person i am. i never -- the whole stand i never cussed out don. even during our little back marmg i've been dealing with don west. >> you actually saw him here in the cnn -- of somebody interested in guns, took a lot of drugs. let's get to the truth about that. did he ever talk to you about guns? >> no. >> did you ever see him with a gun? >> no. >> what about drugs? >> drugs?

okay. weed. you say marijuana -- >> uh-huh. >> we in my area, we see weed. my area weed for trayvon, i can explain one thing. weed don't do -- ever him go crazy. it just ever him go hungry. when the state closed, they trying to explain what kind of person i am. you can see the kind of person i am. i never -- the whole stand i never cussed out don. even during our little back marmg i've been dealing with don west. >> you actually saw him here in the cnn -- >> yeah, yeah, yeah. >> what did that ever you feel to see him again? >> uh-uh, uh-uh. the only reason i haven't said

nothing to don west because my parent taught me better. that's an adult. you don't have the right to disrespect an adult. don't curse. okay. i did give attitude. >> joining me now is george zimmerman's attorney mark o'mara. mark, welcome to you. congratulations on your victory because from a legal point of view you particular personally waged an extremely good defense of your client, and you got the result that obviously he wanted. >> thank you. >> it would be childish to say otherwise. in terms of rachel jeantel i found a fascinating interview on many levels. one that struck me is if that personality had been in court on the stand testifying in the way she spoke to me, would it have been more worrying for you? would she be more engaging to the jury and told us more about the other side of trayvon martin that i don't think we really heard in that case?

>> i'm not sure how she would have presented herself but certainly last night she was more engaging, more straightforward, and i'm not sure why she started out with the attitude that she obviously did in the trial but certainly some of what she could have said was lost on the jury through the attitude. >> she painted a very different picture on martin to the one that was repeatedly rammed home during the trial. she talked to somebody who was pretty quiet, a soft sort of charter. she said he took a bit of weed twice a week. somebody that loved his mom and family and somebody from her understanding of the conversation on that fateful last night, was on his way home. what do you ever of that aspect of what she was saying. >> i'm not sure that we'll fully know. trayvon martin was a 17-year-old teenager. like most of us, we went through those years and i think he had a range of personality traits and range of emotions and whatever. i know the four minutes after he said he was running, there was four minutes before the altercation took place and for whatever reason, misinterpreting george's signals, being worried, afraid, angry, he decided to reingauge in a situation where george zimmerman had the injuries and trayvon martin ended up dead, an event everybody would like to see changed but i have to suggest there is arguments on both sides who is really responsible for it. >> let me throw some devils advocate's questions at you. >> sure. >> a lot of people asking and pondering post acquittal. one is where would trayvon martin's rights to self-defense in all this? if he did throw the first blow

against george zimmerman because he was scared, why should that be the criteria that george zimmerman escaping punishment when he shoots him dead? >> self-defense is clear and gives us reasons and signals. you're allowed to resist force with like force. so if i scream and curse at you, you can scream back and yell back. you can't punch me and you can't shoot me and can't take a knife to me. if we were to presume to george zimmerman's aggressiveness and following him and say george confronted him, even if that were absolutely true, trayvon martin did not have a legal right to attack george zimmerman physically and when he upped the ante by doing that, he caused a cascading round of events that ended up leading to his own death. >> what i was struck by in the trial was the cascading series of events from a legal perspective, really only start when the physical confrontation begins, whereas logic to me indicates it should have started earlier when george zimmerman is driving along and sees trayvon martin and gets out of his vehicle and calls the authorities, et cetera, et cetera, but none of that seemed to be relevant in terms of the law. is that an area where the law could possibly be reviewed and possibly changed? >> couple of answers. the prosecutor certainly tried to ever a great deal about that pre-altercation conversation and all that. so in one sense, it was talked about and discussed and we have

>> self-defense is clear and gives us reasons and signals. you're allowed to resist force with like force. so if i scream and curse at you, you can scream back and yell back. you can't punch me and you can't shoot me and can't take a knife to me. if we were to presume to george zimmerman's aggressiveness and following him and say george confronted him, even if that were absolutely true, trayvon martin did not have a legal right to attack george zimmerman physically and when he upped the ante by doing that, he caused a cascading round of events that ended up leading to his own death. >> what i was struck by in the trial was the cascading series of events from a legal perspective, really only start when the physical confrontation begins, whereas logic to me indicates it should have started earlier when george zimmerman is driving along and sees trayvon martin and gets out of his vehicle and calls the authorities, et cetera, et

cetera, but none of that seemed to be relevant in terms of the law. is that an area where the law could possibly be reviewed and possibly changed? >> couple of answers. the prosecutor certainly tried to ever a great deal about that pre-altercation conversation and all that. so in one sense, it was talked about and discussed and we have to look at it again in context as to what was going on. here is the other consideration, i think we need to have. there is this intersection between what george zimmerman can do as an involved citizen, watching somebody concerned about. we all do that every day. when does it get to the point where george zimmerman's events or actions turn from a concerned citizen into something that was over the line? it seems as though it really only got over the line after that four-minute of silence of trayvon martin and there was a minute and a half of silence of george zimmerman where we don't know what happened but ended up in a physical altercation. >> should he not when he was told we don't need you to do that, turn around and go back in his car, and if he had done that or stayed in his car originally completely, do you accept that that would not have led to the catalyst of events that led to the shooting? >> no question. we can look back now i think there were 1,000 decisions points and none back them but look back now and say there are 1,000 decision points but if we look at what did happen and the natural consequence of it but it's hard to say any action by george zimmerman was so wrong he should be responsible for what happened criminally afterwards. >> i want to play more contentious thing rachel said to me.

what trayvon was telling her on the phone, why they feared perhaps what george zimmerman may be doing. >> there was no doubt in your mind from what trayvon was telling you on the phone about the creepy ass cracker and so on that he absolutely believed that george zimmerman, this man you didn't know who he was at the time, this man was pursuing him? >> yes. points and none back them but look back now and say there are 1,000 decision points but if we look at what did happen and the natural consequence of it but it's hard to say any action by george zimmerman was so wrong he should be responsible for what happened criminally afterwards. >> i want to play more contentious thing rachel said to me. what trayvon was telling her on the phone, why they feared perhaps what george zimmerman may be doing.

>> there was no doubt in your mind from what trayvon was telling you on the phone about the creepy ass cracker and so on that he absolutely believed that george zimmerman, this man you didn't know who he was at the time, this man was pursuing him? >> yes. >> and he was freaked out by it? >> yes. definitely after i say it might be a rapist. for every boy or every man or every whose not that kind of way, you see a grown man following them, would they be creeped out? so you got to take it as a parent, when you -- when you tell your child when you see a grown person following you run away and all that, was you going to stand there? you going to tell your child stand there? if you tell your child stand there, we going to see your child on the news for missing person. >> reaction from the audience they empathized. what it indicated to me trayvon martin was unnerved, scared possibly, this 17-year-old kid older guy following him. doesn't know what is going on

and he may well when they came together, not entirely sure how that happened he may have lashed out in fear. again, i suppose i come back to isn't he perfectly entitled to do that under self-defense himself? why should he lose his life because some guy is following him, and he's freaked out by it? >> couple of reasonable reactions. if in fact, he was that concerned about it, i'm not sure why that never showed up in rachel jeantel's testimony before the trial, it doesn't show up in the internal conversation with ms. fulton or mr. de la rionda and showed up slightly in a deposition. if that fact, trayvon martin was that concerned about his safety, let just say that was better communicated to ms. jeantel and the prosecutor, then why in those four minutes when he had 80 yards why did he stay around so that altercation could occur? because he made the decision to not go home what might have been in his mind? george zimmerman could have gone him? >> absolutely. there was a thousand points this could have not happened. >> anderson cooper had a fascinating interview with a juror, how confusing they found the law. >> the law became very confusing. >> tell me about that. >> it became very confusing. we had stuff thrown at us.

we had the second-degree murder charge, the manslaughter charge, then we had self-defense, stand your ground. >> did you feel like you understood the instructions from the judge because they were very complex. >> that was our problem. i mean, it was just so confusing what went -- what was what and what we could apply to what. >> i mean, it is confusing and complicated, you know, and credit to the jury for taking a long period of time to work this out. in terms of what we do now because the trial is done, the we move onto the f self-def george zimmerman could have gone him? >> absolutely. there was a thousand points this could have not happened. >> anderson cooper had a fascinating interview with a juror, how confusing they found the law. >> the law became very confusing. >> tell me about that. >> it became very confusing. we had stuff thrown at us. we had the second-degree murder charge, the manslaughter charge, then we had self-defense, stand your ground. >> did you feel like you understood the instructions from the judge because they were very complex. >> that was our problem.

i mean, it was just so confusing what went -- what was what and what we could apply to what. >> i mean, it is confusing and complicated, you know, and credit to the jury for taking a long period of time to work this out. in terms of what we do now because the trial is done, the verdict is concluded and we have to respect that verdict, even if people don't agree with it. people have to respect it, i think. we move onto the future. eric holder the attorney general came out and said he's very against the stand your ground law. tell me the difference in simple terms between stand your ground, which you didn't in the end use as a defense here and the normal self-defense law which is applicable all over america. >> if you come at me right now with a knife from where you are under a normal self-defense law, i have to try and get out of way. i have to retreat. if i can, great. if i can't because my back is up against the wall i can react

with deadly force n. a stand your ground situation, they take away my need to retreat. as long as i'm not doing anything wrong, i don't have to retreat. you come at me with a knife from here, i can take out my gun and shoot you. that can be problematic because it allows the person to not try the last chance out. now george didn't have that opportunity in his case, but the statute is trouble some in that regard. >> it's trouble some because gang leaders are saying it saying hey, i came face-to-face with a rival gun member and he was going to shoot me. i'm with eric holder on this. in terms of self-defense as a law, in light of what happened in this case and you defend many people and, you next i'll ever it clear, you defend many young black teenagers, you've done that in the past, as well. are there changes to the self-defense law you think that we should now consider as a result of this? >> traditional self-defense, no,

works perfectly and been around for all most 1,000 years and it says when confronted with force you're allowed to react. you punch me, i can punch you. you yell at me, i can yell at you. you take a knife out, i can take a knife out, maybe a gun. that doesn't need to change. the stand your ground law is again, as we talked about troubling but self-defense itself, it has to be there for us to protect ourselves. >> final question, briefly, if you don't mind, how is george zimmerman and do you think he'll ever be able to lead a normal life? >> he'll never be able to walk down the street and wonder who will hate him next. he really wanted this trial and he wanted to testify because he wanted to give his side and say to america and to his jury, why he had to do what he had to do. but regardless of that, the outpouring of anger and hatred that's shown up is more trouble some for him. he'll never have a normal life. i think he'll always be hiding because we don't know how that one person with unreasonable

anger may react on him. >> mark o'mara, thank you you've always been considerate to this show. radio host tom joiner is next. yummy, scrumptious bars. hmm? i just wanted you to eat more fiber. chewy, oatie, gooeyness... and fraudulence. i'm in deep, babe. you certainly are. [ male announcer ] fiber one. i'm in deep, babe. you certainly are. peoi go to angie's listt for all kinds of reasons. to gauge whether or not the projects will be done in a timely fashion and within budget. angie's list members can tell you which provider is the best in town.

you'll find reviews on everything from home repair to healthcare. now that we're expecting, i like the fact i can go onto angie's list and look for pediatricians. the service providers that i've found on angie's list actually have blown me away. find out why more than two million members count on angie's list. angie's list -- reviews you can trust. i've got a nice long life ahead. big plans. so when i found out medicare doesn't pay all my medical expenses, i looked at my options. then i got a medicare supplement insurance plan. [ male announcer ] if you're eligible for medicare, you may know it only covers about 80% of your part b medical expenses. the rest is up to you. call now and find out about an aarp medicare supplement insurance plan, insured by unitedhealthcare insurance company. like all standardized medicare supplement plans, it helps pick up some of what medicare doesn't pay. and could save you thousands in out-of-pocket costs.

to me, relationships matter. i've been with my doctor for 12 years. now i know i'll be able to stick with him. [ male announcer ] with these types of plans, you'll be able to visit any doctor or hospital that accepts medicare patients. plus, there are no networks, and you never need a referral to see a specialist. so don't wait. call now and request this free decision guide to help you better understand medicare... and which aarp medicare supplement plan might be best for you. there's a wide range to choose from. we love to travel -- and there's so much more to see. so we found a plan that can travel with us. anywhere in the country. [ male announcer ] join the millions of people who have already enrolled in the only medicare supplement insurance plans endorsed by aarp, an organization serving the needs of people 50 and over for generations. remember, all medicare supplement insurance plans help cover what medicare doesn't pay.

and could save you thousands a year in out-of-pocket costs. call now to request your free decision guide. and learn more about the kinds of plans that will be here for you now -- and down the road. i have a lifetime of experience. so i know how important that is. rachel jeantel spoke last night and talked movingly about her friendship with trayvon martin. what would you talk about? >> really what we going to be in life, how life going to happen, what's going on currently around that time, and around that time it was both of our birthday had passed so we was talking about what happened and that. >> he was a good friend to you? >> yes. >> kind friend? >> yes. >> my next guest was listening to that interview and that was the moment he decided he wanted to help rachel jeantel. tom is with me. what was it about that interview and rachel that made you think

she deserves my help here? >> well, it all started of course at the trial, and when she testified, the reaction to her testimony was very troubling to me. people were criticizing her and her education and communication skills and the way the lawyer was just beating her up on the stand, just really moved me and then last night when i saw her on your show, you did a followup question that said what do you want to do in life? >> yeah. >> you went to that to what was trayvon like and described trayvon as her best friend and they talked about any and everything but you didn't say what do you want to do in life? that's when the lightbulb went

off. i said i want to help her. we have a foundation that helps students in historically black colleges and universities. the tom joyner has been around and raised $65 million to that end. we have done -- we have done full-ride scholarships before. i don't remember if you know the case of wilson a few years ago in georgia. he was convicted of rape and the law said that any underaged girl who had sex with anyone of any age could be convicted of rape. they since changed that law and he got caught up in it. we got him a second chance. we got him a full ride to moore house and he graduated this past

may. so i saw -- i saw -- i saw rachel jeantel on your show and i said she deserves a chance, especially after -- especially after you ask her what did you think -- what did she think about the juror and her impression of her. >> i wanted to play you that -- i want to play you that to remind people. i want to play what the juror said about rachel's lack of education and how rachel responded and get your response to both. >> uneducated, no communication skills, what do you feel what about that juror said about you? >> angry, upset and then the closing when the state closed, they trying to explain what kind of person i am and you could see the kind of person i am. >> that was rachel's response. i think we know what the juror said.

i was going to play that but we won't. we know what the juror said -- >> i had the same reaction. i had the same reaction as rachel. i was hurt, angered and the same thing happened the day after she testified. i had a -- we have a big social media outlet and people were just talking about her, talking about the way she looked and the way she presented herself, and i'm -- i'm looking at a 19-year-old girl who like a lot of -- like a lot of 19-year-old black youth have a hard time getting people to listen, and people then judge, you know, because they don't listen, and i thought -- and i thought that in

the courtroom that no one was really listening to her. she was saying what she felt and what was true -- >> right, we also -- >> in her heart -- >> we also had her going through last night some of the language that young people in particular, black and white these days which can be misconstrued by older people. i want to play you a clip by rush limbaugh, that dinosaur that came out with a predictable response. listen to this. >> so nigga with an a on the end, i think i can now. isn't that the point? because it's not racist. that's the point. i could be talking about a male. i could be -- a chinese male. the guy at the laundry mat, i could be talking about a man. that's what he said it means. >> i mean what his response showed me, tom, was similar to the disconnect i detected between the juror that we heard from and rachel jeantel and trayvon martin's backgrounds and

world. i mean, a completely different world of these people living in. >> first of all, i don't think rush limbaugh has license to use the "n" word, so he should say the "n" word. she shouldn't say the actual word. i don't say it. and that's -- and that's number one. that's the way they talk. that the the way they communicate and that's the way it should be taken, and all this criticism about, you know, how the system is failed her or she's failed the system. she's 19 years old and a senior in high school. in the past year and a half her life has been turned upside down. she's been back and forth with depositions and appointments and everything, plus sad about her best friend being killed. so her senior year is a wreck. when we talk to -- we talked to her people today and it's going to take some work, first of all, to get her high school diploma

and get her ready for the sats test and then entered into college, but we are going to do that. we help students in historically black colleges. i told her she can go to any historical black college she wants to, particularly in florida. >> it would be a great thing, tom. >> she wants to go into criminal justice. >> which may be a fantastic thing for her to do. thank you for joining me and i wish you the very best in helping rachel. thank you. >> thank you. rachel jeantel and the "n" word, reaction to what he said and what her testimony meant for the case. at farmers we make you smarter about insurance,

because what you dont know can hurt you. what if you didn't know that it's smart to replace washing-machine hoses every five years? what if you didn't know that you might need extra coverage for more expensive items? and what if you didn't know that teen drivers are four times more likely to get into an accident? 'sup the more you know, the better you can plan for what's ahead. talk to farmers and get smarter about your insurance. ♪ we are farmers bum - pa - dum, bum - bum - bum -bum ♪

well, the jury, they see their side. no offense to the jury, they old. that's old school people. we in the new school, our generation, my generation. >> rachel jeantel's candid feelings about the jury that acquitted george zimmerman. a lot to say about those six women, a lot of people do. >> gloria, let me start with you, if i may. what are the lessons that we can learn from this trial, if any, going forward? >> well, i think that as to rachel jeantel, obviously, she needed to be prepared as a witness and she didn't get the kind of preparation that she needed. she was a lot more relaxed with you last night on the interview, piers and that's because she wasn't subject to the kind of

cross-examination that every witness can expect to get in a courtroom because that's a tough place to be and it takes precision, questions and it takes precision answers and she can't just kind of engage in a narrative wondering around as she can frankly on a talk show. having said that, it was very -- we got a lot of insight into her last night in your interview because she was able to talk and say what she wanted to say in a more relaxed setting. i think the lesson of the trial is that it is a very heated contest of facts and the law has to be applied. i think the jurors did their very best. the jury even cried, all the jury apparently cried when they finally had to render a verdict because they really did look at the evidence and gave their best decision, and i think we all have to respect that, and i'm sorry that the jury is being attacked in the way they are. >> i certainly wouldn't attack the jury. you're a jury consultant because the jury clearly wrestled with this a long time, over 16 hours. it clearly was an emotional decision for them and in the end, most legal experts would say they applied the letter of the law of self-defense that applies in florida and indeed around america and the prosecution failed in their case. >> well, and i think that's true. i mean, the truth here is that we spend our time looking at the psychology of human judgment, and jurors don't necessarily understand the niceties of the law or the facts of the case before they go in. so in this particular case you have jurors who talked about the i think the jurors did their very best. the jury even cried, all the jury apparently cried when they finally had to render a verdict because they really did look at the evidence and gave their best decision, and i think we all have to respect that, and i'm sorry that the jury is being attacked in the way they are. >> i certainly wouldn't attack the jury.

you're a jury consultant because the jury clearly wrestled with this a long time, over 16 hours. it clearly was an emotional decision for them and in the end, most legal experts would say they applied the letter of the law of self-defense that applies in florida and indeed around america and the prosecution failed in their case. >> well, and i think that's true. i mean, the truth here is that we spend our time looking at the psychology of human judgment, and jurors don't necessarily understand the niceties of the law or the facts of the case before they go in. so in this particular case you have jurors who talked about the protest before the trial is riding. you talked about a woman who talked about an altercation and the gun went off and a less son she taught her kids about not going out at night. they bring their own experiences and they bring their own particular biases.

they may not be racial but they bring their own set of life experiences to it and they as you can hear, especially with b 37 she had a difficult time relating to rachel jeantel and could relate to george zimmerman. all of these things play out as the facts unfold as the jurors try to understand and put together their version of what happened. >> the problem i think is that how this law both stand your ground and self-defense gets applied in different ways around america. this is awful case of this woman marissia alexander, a young african american mother sentenced to 20 years in prison for firing a gun in her home near her husband. she told the court her husband was abusive. she had a protective order against him and the shot was just a warning shot. the husband wasn't injured. now angela corey prosecuted that case, as well. and the judge ruled that they

couldn't use stand your ground, and she was found guilty, and is serving 20 years in prison. now when you compare that to what george zimmerman did, he killed a young teenager unarmed. where is the equalness, the fairness in this system? >> well, and piers, i think -- that -- >> let me ask gloria, first, if you don't mind richard. >> i was going to say the boggles the mind and doesn't ever sense and here we have in the case you described an allocation by a victim of domestic violence that in fact, she was being threatened that she had been threatened in the past and that she shot the gun, she couldn't retreat out of the garage because he was standing there in her way and allegedly threatening her according to him -- according to her. the jury didn't obviously believe it, and therefore she is in prison. it very, very disturbing. here in the trayvon martin case we didn't have trayvon martin, unfortunately, may he rest in peace because he was deceased, and the jury did believe that the final confrontation or the only confrontation, depending on your point of view was such that george zimmerman did use force, reasonable force under the circumstances that he was in imminent fear of death or great bodily harm and that therefore he had a right to self-defense and that's why they acquitted him. angela corey, i want to say one other thing. past and that she shot the gun, she couldn't retreat out of the garage because he was standing there in her way and allegedly threatening her according to him -- according to her. the jury didn't obviously believe it, and therefore she is in prison. it very, very disturbing.

here in the trayvon martin case we didn't have trayvon martin, unfortunately, may he rest in peace because he was deceased, and the jury did believe that the final confrontation or the only confrontation, depending on your point of view was such that george zimmerman did use force, reasonable force under the circumstances that he was in imminent fear of death or great bodily harm and that therefore he had a right to self-defense and that's why they acquitted him. angela corey, i want to say one other thing. i'm very, very disturbed that she did even after the verdict call george zimmerman a murderer. i do not think that's what a prosecutor should do. a prosecutor is there to seek justice, not to win a case and i think she was out of bounds and disrespectful of the jury to

call him a murderer after he was acquitted by the jury. >> i think all her behavior since this verdict is disgrateful and sums up the prosecution case from the moment they overcharged as many people believe to the way they conducted it to even the way they briefed rachel jeantel, who as i 20-minute interviewed last night got more out of her about trayvon martin's real charter than we heard in the entire trial, which seems non-sense kill. >> two of the o.j. simpson jurors, this is a question for you as a jury expect. people say there should have been more black people on this jury and it would have been more balanced with zimmerman but in the o.j. case that was predominantly jury who acquitted when most people felt o.j.

simpson was guilty. is it not just always going to be the case that where race is the overriding issue in a case like this or o.j. that black people will be more tended to vote their way perhaps towards the black part of the case, white people will do the opposite? is that not just human nature in these cases? >> well, i wrote a piece today on cnn.com in terms of an opinion because we have to change how we talk about race, and it's not just about skin color. it about life experiences. three quarters of the jurors in the o.j. simpson case had a negative police experience. yes, some of it absolutely was related to skin color but we have to talk about how people relate to each other, and there's actually some research out there, which tells us that diverse juries actually ever better decisions, because there is more diversity of opinion. they ever less errors, so i

ree® it's 100% real milk that's easy to digest so you can fully enjoy the dairy you love. lactaid®. for 25 years, easy to digest. easy to love.

for 25 years, wyuu1 0

breaking news, a statement, this is from five of the remaining six jurors in the zimmerman case who haven't so far spoken out, and they issued a statement jointly saying we the under signed jurors understand there is a great deal of interest in this case but we ask you to remember we're not public officials and did not

invite this attention into our lives and the opinions of juror b 37 expressed on the anderson cooper show were her own and not representative of the jurors listing below. serving on this jury is highly emotional and physically draining for all of us. the death of a teenager weighed on our hearts but in the end we did what we were asked to do and ask the media to respect our privacy and give us time to process what we've been through. the moment o.j. was found not guilty, the verdict was shocking. joining me two of the simpson jurors. we got a statement for four of the six. one has already spoken out and this was on behalf of four of the others. obviously, they have been through a heck of an ordeal. you went through it. do you empathize -- >> definitely, i do empathize with them for sure. >> did they reach the right verdict, do you think? >> definitely not. definitely not. >> you would have found him

guilty of second-degree murder or manslaughter? >> second degree murder, of course. i'm one of those people that believe george zimmerman was predisposed to go out and kill someone that evening because of the fact of all of the frustration he had built up in the previous calls prior -- that led up to this particular incident and his desire to not let them get away with anything anymore, and so -- and again, this is my personal -- >> do you think he racially profiled trayvon martin? >> definitely, i do believe that. >> david, you as a jury obviously caused considerably controversy because you acquitted o.j. simpson and many people felt that he was as guilty as sin. do you stand by that decision that you took? >> most definitely. we were given -- we were given evidence and there were a lot of stuff was fishy on that. i do believe there were some of the detectives were crooked and i do believe some of the evidence was planted for the mere fact that the department of justice, when they received that

vile of blood it was three quarters full whereas the nurse that took the blood, i can't remember the gentleman's name he said twice he filled that vile to the very top. so what happened to the other quarter of the blood -- >> you have no doubt to this day you think o.j. simpson was not guilty? >> i have no doubt whatsoever. >> what would you do with george zimmerman based on the evidence you heard from that trial? >> well, sorry, but i got to disagree with you on that. i would have found him innocent on what they had. what they had -- what the prosecution has given and it just seemed like everything was shaky. they were relying on -- it seemed like every time they would put on a witness, it was -- they were on the defense -- defensive side, and it just -- a lot of things were

just not some of the witnesses they put on and a lot of things just didn't ever sense to me on that. >> what is interesting to me about that response from david is there is a theory on the o.j. simpson case a mainly black jury acquitted a black man. in this case, predominantly white jury acquitted a white/hispanic man. do you think, though, that race is that important in a jury's decision making from your experience. is it human nature? >> in a general sense -- >> in a general sense but leaning, as well in your experience being a juror in a highly motivated race case. >> in a general sense i wouldn't know for sure because you don't know what goes into people's mind sets in jurors but in regard to my experience, and the fact of the matter was with me in the o.j. simpson case, i actually voted my conviction that based on the evidence

presented to me in that case at trial and i thought the prosecution in that case did put on a very weak case, i had no alternative but to rule for reasonable doubt, which is all i gave him in that instance, really. >> how many of the jurors for awhile thought that o.j. was guilty and changed their minds. >> how would i know that? >> you didn't discuss it? >> you mean like in jury deliberation. >> in deliberations when it came up, and your question again was? >> how many in your jury with o.j. started off believing he was guilty and changed their minds? >> probably ten people. >> really? >> yes. >> and did they change their minds because there was simply doubt brought in or felt overwhelming evidence? >> here is the difference here, piers, the one thing people lose sight of, my feeling about the verdict in that case, being sequestered as a juror played into that particular verdict, i feel. >> how long were you sequestered? >> ten and a half months. >> and came back in four hours. >> because people wanted to leave. they were tired of being there. >> right. >> i feel that some people in the jury, the fight was out of them. they didn't want to stand for >> probably ten people. >> really? >> yes. >> and did they change their minds because there was simply doubt brought in or felt overwhelming evidence? >> here is the difference here, piers, the one thing people lose sight of, my feeling about the verdict in that case, being sequestered as a juror played

into that particular verdict, i feel. >> how long were you sequestered? >> ten and a half months. >> and came back in four hours. >> because people wanted to leave. they were tired of being there. >> right. >> i feel that some people in the jury, the fight was out of them. they didn't want to stand for their own convictions and i think based on that is partly the reason we came back with the verdict as soon as we did. >> david, it clearly plays a part and clearly this jury has been away from families, many mothers been away for quite sometime and there must be a desire to get it done. we know they were going to ask a question about the definition of manslaughter and then didn't. could it be they just ran out of energy and said let's just deal with this now? >> yeah, i think something was wrong -- i know they asked the judge for some type of -- they had a question but then she sent

them back saying break down that question a little more and they didn't come back with it so maybe they were at the point saying we don't need to have it. they gave us what we need to work with, and that's what we worked with. >> fascinating to talk with you two. you know what they have been through. thank you very much indeed. >> thank you. >> you're welcome, piers. a lot to say about the case, and he joins me live, my old america's got talent buddy still wearing terrible suits. which is why at liberty mutual insurance, auto policies come with new car replacement and accident forgiveness if you qualify. see what else comes standard at libertymutual.com. liberty mutual insurance. responsibility. what's your policy?

chantix... it's a non-nicotine pill. i didn't want nicotine to give up nicotine. [ male announcer ] along with support, chantix (varenicline) is proven to help people quit smoking. [ mike ] when i was taking the chantix, it reduced the urge to smoke. [ male announcer ] some people had changes in behavior, thinking or mood, hostility, agitation, depressed mood and suicidal thoughts or actions while taking or after stopping chantix. if you notice any of these, stop taking chantix and call your doctor right away. tell your doctor about any history of depression or other mental health problems, which could get worse while taking chantix. don't take chantix if you've had a serious allergic or skin reaction to it. if you develop these, stop taking chantix and see your doctor right away as some can be life-threatening. tell your doctor if you have a history of heart or blood vessel problems, or if you develop new or worse symptoms. get medical help right away if you have symptoms of a heart attack or stroke. use caution when driving or operating machinery. common side effects include nausea, trouble sleeping and unusual dreams. it feels wonderful. i don't smoke. i don't smoke. [ male announcer ] ask your doctor if chantix is right for you.

breaking news tonight. four jurors are staying tonight, her opinions are her own and do not represent all their opinions. the zimmerman verdict is touching a nerve across america. joining me is nick cannon, host of "america's got talent." a show shown late at night on nbc. how are you? >> good, man. >> i'm taking it back ant your suit. the problem is the tie and the and handkerchief. they are which brand? >> nick cannon. >> let's talk about this zimmerman trial. you've been tweeting about it. what do you think about the verdict? >> honestly, i was disappointed in the verdict. i believe this entire trial has almost been viewed as a report card for our nation, our progress report for over the

years of our injustice or even i would say as, in my opinion, as a black man having faith in the justice system. i mean, i believe that's where the tension originally came from when we were all introduced to the trayvon martin case and where it ended. we still don't have faith in the justice system. >> do you think that zimmerman racially profiled trayvon martin? >> i do. i believe so, because we all have issues with prejudice, and i think as a nation we're afraid to own up to it. when you think about what prejudice means, it means to prejudge. we know he prejudged him. he didn't know that young man from a can of payment. so to prejudge him, to be prejudiced against him, that was clearly wrong. and we all do. >> but he, in the end, precipitated it, george zimmerman, is my whole problem with the case. if he hadn't ignored the advice not to follow after trayvon, then there would have been no altercation and no shooting. to then shoot a young teenager, who is unarmed as it turns out, and to get zero punishment, that's where i have an issue about this. i respect the jury decision. >> absolutely. >> i respect the fact that they adhered to the law, but the law in this case is an ass it seems to me. >> absolutely. i also made the statement, my gran the tension originally came from when we were all introduced to the trayvon martin case and where it ended. we still don't have faith in the justice system. >> do you think that zimmerman racially profiled trayvon martin? >> i do. i believe so, because we all have issues with prejudice, and i think as a nation we're afraid to own up to it. when you think about what prejudice means, it means to prejudge. we know he prejudged him. he didn't know that young man from a can of payment. so to prejudge him, to be prejudiced against him, that was

clearly wrong. and we all do. >> but he, in the end, precipitated it, george zimmerman, is my whole problem with the case. if he hadn't ignored the advice not to follow after trayvon, then there would have been no altercation and no shooting. to then shoot a young teenager, who is unarmed as it turns out, and to get zero punishment, that's where i have an issue about this. i respect the jury decision. >> absolutely. >> i respect the fact that they adhered to the law, but the law

in this case is an ass it seems to me. >> absolutely. i also made the statement, my grandfather told me, he said just because it's the law doesn't mean it's right. history has proven that time and time again. you know, civil rights to women's rights, we're a growing nation, and we've made some horrible decisions with the law, and i believe right now this law, whether it's stand your ground or how this was rolled out, was definitely the wrong decision. it's unfortunate. but we have to live with it. we still live in the greatest country in the world, and yes, i said it, america, not the uk. >> i was wondering where you were going with that. >> but it's unfortunate how this case came to be. >> when you see rachel jeantel talking to me as she did last night, it seemed that this all-white jury, predominantly with one hispanic lady, had no real sense of connection with

this young black woman or indeed trayvon martin. >> right. and, again, it was unfortunate. i think -- i go back to say that it's a report card for how we deal with each other socially, how we communicate with each other, and to see that they are clearly two totally different generations. almost from two totally different worlds. >> your show is apparently the highest rated hour of m-tv 2. >> i was trying to be a nice guy and invite you on a show that people actually watch. >> last night we had our highest rated interview ever. let's take a look at a clip of your show now. >> all right. you lucky to be here. where is your four-leaf clover? i just checked my watch. your 15 minutes is over. >> see, piers, you can come on here. >> i thought, my god, i actually enjoyed part of this. going well? >> it's on right now, i'm pretty

sure record ratings. >> i saw the finale ratings were down 33% without me. surely not, not with the great howard stern. >> you are missed. we had a great rapport and maybe you could come back. you've got some kind of talent. >> maybe i'll come and save your show. nick cannon, great to see you. that's all for us tonight. anderson cooper starts in a few moments.

♪ good evening and welcome to "360 town hall." race injustices in america. tonight, a conversation sparked by current events, in this case, the acquittal of george zimmerman and killing of trayvon martin. it's a conversation rooted deep in american history. for 2 1/2 centuries, the subject has changed from slavery to jim crow, from poll taxes to voting rights. however, even as the issues evolve, the theme stays constant. race and justice. namely whether justice applies differently and is seen differently, depending on skin color. race, justice, who we are as americans. it's an important conversation coming up, with distinguished voices from many points of view. but first, the case that brought us here. no homicide can be called routine.